Requesting Michael Jackson at gym?

[Bellabow]

Our PT asks if we have any song requests before the session.

A couple of times Michael Jackson sings have been requested.

AIBU in thinking (despite a few good tunes) it's inappropriate to listen to his music nowadays?

Used to like meant, my brain gets my words muddled sometimes.

His music and dance and talent will always be remembered, it is silly to say that you would switch off anything that gets played anywhere.

What age were the men when he stood trial? Am I right in saying that they were under 18?

I dunno, I'm just very uneasy about the whole MJ thing. I love his music but I just can't bring myself to listen as I used to. As @BorderlineHappy says, if there was an obscenely wealthy 40 year old man that you knew in real life having young boys over for a sleepover you would be outraged!

MJ wasn’t convicted. Anyway, I still listen to R.Kelly although I sometimes think about the lyrics in a different light!

Jimmy Saville was never convicted and any accusations that came out were after his death? Nothing has ever been proven. So using your logic we should sit in on a Saturday night watching reruns of Jim'll Fix It?

Completely different scenario. Jimmy Savill was not put against a jury in a criminal trial during his lifetime and when he was posthumously investigated the complaints against him were upheld. So he would have been prosecuted in life and he would have very probably if not definitely been convicted.

@NetflixWatcher

I love his music but I do believe he was a peodophile which makes me uncomfortable to like his stuff but he was a great performer. I like used to love R.Kelly too. The film his 'I believe I can fly' song plays in was on the other day and I swear they cut it out. Usually plays at the end but it didn't.

I suspect you are correct. But the facts still remain that he wasn’t convicted and this died an innocent man. Hence why his music is still played.

It's difficult as he's not alive now so not benefiting from the money. I think there'd be a clear cut answer then. I don't know.

@Bellabow

And also - it's out of sight out of mind for you then? Abusive men are OK as long as they are ones you don't come across in any way in your everyday life? It must be very comfortable to have such a - narrowly defined moral compass.

Don't really understand this? Should I be actively searching for stuff to avoid?

It's not a question of actively searching for things to avoid. Harvey Weinstein, Johnny Depp and Roman Polanski are all high-profile men. The point I was making is that you only seem to be bothered by Michael Jackson's music being played at your gym where you can hear it - thus it seems that you don't have a problem with abusive men making art per se, just as long as you are never required to be exposed to it. Which is a very comfortable way to live your life. I was just wondering whether you were going to expand your horizons and campaign against this on a wider scale?

@WhereverIGoddamnLike

Do you want to remove all artwork, sculpture, writing, film, music but anyone ever accused of a crime? Or are you just picking and choosing based on which things are still modern, widely publicised and easy to shout about?

Judging by the way people are tearing down statues, changing names of streets and buildings, burning flags, etc. that is exactly what they want to do. Erase from history anyone who committed a "crime" even if it was not a crime but status quo when they committed it. Wipe out Mark Twain and Rudyard Kipling and Robert E. Lee and Winston Churchill -- they were all racist criminals based on today's standards.

A lot of people spend their time looking for things to be offended by...

Maybe, but since that's entirely irrelevant in the context of the point I was making, I'm not sure what it contributes.

On the other hand, a lot of people are hypocrites, as the OP is so skilfully demonstrating in the post you quoted.

It's really hard. IF he was guilty of all or any of the things he's supposed to have done, obviously it's insupportable.

But he was never convicted of anything.

His music (some of it) is genuinely classic. I for one would be sad to think I might never hear, say, Off the Wall again, despite my misgivings about him personally.

I think comparing Michael Jackson music to Rolf Harris is a bit, well. Out there really, Rolf Harris isn’t on much because he was never as big as mj.

I get the issue op, and I’m not sure to be honest, I think you can seperate liking his music from what he apparantly did and was. Because he is dead now.

It would be very different if he was still alive and profiting, but he’s not.

I like his music. I have no opinion on him- as a person or as to his innocence or otherwise.

@BluebellsGreenbells

Why? His estate is still profiting from airplay. Do you not see that as wrong?

What of her been a child murderer instead? He’s given a lot of children a life sentence for his own gains. He’s proceeds should’ve been handed over to victims.

“His estate” don’t you mean his heirs, as in his children? Who are innocent. The money isn’t going to any criminals

I think there is a massive difference between choosing not to listen to his songs yourself as a result of the allegations, and trying to stop others listening to them.

I also think the OP is going to be shocked when they research these 'Miramax issues' they don't know anything about and find out it was listerally the number 1 news story for a good while last year...

There are so many artists that have questionable pasts - albeit with a broad range in severity and evil-ness. If you start banning all of them there will be literally nothing left. Instead, surely it's simply up to an individual whether or not the crime/evil means they no longer want to listen to their songs, look at their paintings, read their poems, watch their films, read their books...

Personally I wouldn't want to listen to MJ, his music is great but it makes me uncomfortable.

The same way I don't listen to lost prophet or Gary Glitter, I just don't want to because they disgust me.

I am confused. Hasn't it come out that Johny Depp was actually a victim rather than abuser?👀 or have I missed something. I don't particularly follow celeb news, just see what's the biggest as it makes top news on bbc and such.

I like MJ's music. I separate artist from the art.

This thread actually made me wonder about people buying art from serial killers. Manson (he didn't mill anyone with his own hands but still), BTK and even likes of Rose West all sell their art. And it sells. I wonder if people buy it for the art or for the artist.

I don't see what his estate receiving profits has to do with anything? The people receiving the money haven't done anything wrong. His talent was undeniable. It's his talent you're listening to.

If, and it's only an if, he did wrong, that doesn't stop his music being brilliant.

I can't believe that someone NEVER saw any movie by Miramax😱

Or Walt Disney. Or Louis B Mayer...

His music was amazing unfortunately I can't separate my feelings.
I always remember asking why he hung around with DC my dad said "he has a child mind and afterwards they're after his money"
Same with Saville mainly because both were part of my childhood. 🤮
How blinded

@GirlCrush

Hold on so his earlier stuff would be ok as he was innocent then bit later stuff not ok as he was no longer innocent?

So on what date exactly does this switch? What dates did his conviction give??

This is it to me, it quickly becomes silly. And I think he probably did do most or all of what people said he did.

But there are all kinds of music and art and theatre where the people involved were likely immoral twits, and we just don't know about it.

MJ had a huge influence on pop music, and it really would be difficult to get away from that even if you avoided his songs.

If he were alive and you didn't want to support hi monetarily, I can understand that. But what benefit comes from not listening to his music now?

@SwimmingOnEggshells

You'd think so. I still hear him on the radio which I think is weird. You certainly don't hear Rolf Harris played!

No one wants to work out to, 'Tie me kangaroo down, Sport.'

If he were alive and you didn't want to support hi monetarily, I can understand that. But what benefit comes from not listening to his music now?

I’d stop feeling sick every time it comes on the radio or part of a film

Ultimately I think people's individual comfort of lack thereof does play a role in what gets played. I have a certain artist I don't like to listen to after reading a story relating to a forced abortion, but so far as I know there has never been a call to ban his music, so it's still easy to find it on the radio.

If they put old Saville reruns back on tv, I think even if no one complained, people just would be too disgusted to watch it. And maybe that's because of the level of disgust with his acts, but also I suspect speaks to the quality of his talent.

Some people don't want to listen to MJ but many still do, and so he gets played. People are a little more ambiguous about him personally, maybe they doubt his guilt, maybe they remember when he was an abused little boy himself. Maybe it's also about the quality of his talent transcending who he was personally.